Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era? - Page 5 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #41 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 01:42 AM
Winning World titles, Custom Made Clothes
 
RyanPelley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belleville, Indiana
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
                     
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chapo View Post
But having him win it, dropping it the next night to Austin then a few months later, having him and Taker as "co-champions" was a bad idea.
It was pretty stupid. The Taker / Kane / Mankind / Austin stuff at first was a total clusterfuck. (Thank god Kane + Taker in late 1998 was fucking awesome) But I think the most logical reasoning behind this was simply, ratings.

The WWF was hot again, as was WCW. Going back and forth in the ratings. Honestly, who didn't want to see Austin get his rematch the night after King of the Ring? Raw won the ratings that night 5.36 to Nitro's 4.1


That has got to be Kane.
RyanPelley is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 04:56 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
dddsssccc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 670
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
   
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

WWE made very few mistakes during this era which is probably why it was so successful.

Bret would have fit in fine with the Attitude era. I remember his promo where he ripped HBK/HHH and called them homos etc. He had that kind of attitude when needed.

Kane's one day title run seemed stupid. I would have had him carry it for a month or so before having Austin win it back at a PPV.

The higher power being Vince was a slight letdown but kept the Austin/McMahon feud going and gave us that memorable phrase "It was me Austin, It was me all along".

Rikishi being the driver and doing it for the Rock. WWE meant well and was trying to elevate Rikishi but even they quickly realized they made a mistake which is why Triple H very quickly became the real mastermind behind all that in storyline.

The Wrestlemania 2000 main event should have either been Rock/Triple H in a singles or Mick Foley should have won the 4-way. You should either give fans the greatest match possible (Triple H/Rock in their prime one on one at WM) or the great story (Mick winning) and they gave us neither.

Summerslam 1999 should have been Austin/Triple H one on one. Mick Foley also got thrown into this match. I suppose so Austin wouldn't have to job to a heel Triple H. Mick dropped the title the next night to Triple H but I always felt like Triple H should have won that title at Summerslam because it was the biggest WWE event of the summer and he had all the momentum in the world at that time.

I think turning Austin heel was a mistake. He became a good heel but he was just too important as a face to turn heel imo.

The whole invasion storyline. Should have just coughed up the cash for guys like Goldberg so they could be the top Alliance heels feuding with top WWE faces like Austin, Rock etc.
dddsssccc is offline  
post #43 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 05:07 AM
Humbled
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WHERE THE BUFFALO ROAM
Posts: 15,868
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

My personal: not making the HUGE Raven/Taker feud, with a HIAC blow-off in 2002.
Chismo is offline  
post #44 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 06:34 AM
HE'S FAT
 
Rocky Mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,748
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRulz View Post
My personal: not making the HUGE Raven/Taker feud, with a HIAC blow-off in 2002.
lol no

thats too big of a push for a guy like Raven

aside from a few marks no one gave a shit about Raven in 2002 , he was not over and he was placed in filler matches for Sunday Night Heat

he might be good promo guy but that's just about it, nothing special about him

Rocky Mark is offline  
post #45 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 07:51 AM
Crumbled
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Infraction City
Posts: 12,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                     
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Regarding the Kane title reign:

He was never meant to be the guy to hold the lengthy reign or properly main event like Austin, Rock, HHH etc. Vince McMahon had been trying to get one over on Austin ever since there feud began. He knew that if he invested in Kane and add the first blood stipulation (knowing Kane is masked), he'll finally get over on his rival and he did.

Kane wasn't on the level of the Austins, The Rocks, the Triple Hs, The Undertakers etc. which is why he rarely ever beat them. So when Austin went one on one with him the following night he was always going to win (hence why Bearer and Vince never wanted Kane to accept Austins challenge)

I thought it was a good angle and definitely wasn't anywhere near one of the biggest mistakes.
Cookie Monster is offline  
post #46 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 11:14 AM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
WWETopTen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 664
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
             
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie Monster View Post
Regarding the Kane title reign:

He was never meant to be the guy to hold the lengthy reign or properly main event like Austin, Rock, HHH etc. Vince McMahon had been trying to get one over on Austin ever since there feud began. He knew that if he invested in Kane and add the first blood stipulation (knowing Kane is masked), he'll finally get over on his rival and he did.

Kane wasn't on the level of the Austins, The Rocks, the Triple Hs, The Undertakers etc. which is why he rarely ever beat them. So when Austin went one on one with him the following night he was always going to win (hence why Bearer and Vince never wanted Kane to accept Austins challenge)

I thought it was a good angle and definitely wasn't anywhere near one of the biggest mistakes.
Austin was the new face of the company. He should've held the title for at least 6 months, which he did minus that one day. Still, it was pointless and never should've happened. He certainly shouldn't have dropped the belt to Kane, who was certainly not ready. I'm as big a Kane-a-nite as snybody but that's the truth.

That being said, Kane should've had a legit title reign in 1999 or 2000. He was certainly more deserving than Triple H in August of 1999.

My Top Ten Favorite Wrestlers of All-Time
1. Stone Cold Steve Austin
2. The Rock
3. Undertaker
4. Kane
5. CM Punk
6. Shawn Michaels
7. Daniel Bryan
8. Goldberg
9. Triple H
10. Mick Foley

Those are my top ten and I really don't care who agrees or disagrees.
PS- I HATE SMARKS!
WWETopTen is offline  
post #47 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 11:16 AM
Working on my abs
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Accrington, England
Posts: 2,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                 
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KO Bossy View Post
Now, onto some of the biggest Attitude mistakes...

Well, obviously Rikishi's "I did it for the Rock" makes this list. That heel turn basically killed him, and was so underwhelming. "What, this fat dancing joke of a guy ran over the top babyface in the company and now they're feuding? OK...

I'm gonna avoid stuff like Mae Young and the hand. Those were just stupid storylines, we all know it, every era has them. I'm gonna try to get to the big issues.

I think El Chapo will agree with me when I say that one of the biggest mistakes of Attitude was the Fed's handling of ECW guys, specifically Raven and Tazz. My God, Tazz, what did they do to you? They could have done so much with Tazz, and by his second PPV appearance he was taking on Bossman and Bull Buchanan. I'd have loved to see a Tazz vs Big Show feud where Tazz just completely owned him right before he went to OVW. Can you imagine how much that would have solidified him? Instead, by the summer he was jobbing to Jerry Lawler. That was handled so poorly.

Chyna's IC title run was really terrible, but at least she was over. More than I can say for most of the title holders of today.

Billy Gunn's KOTR 1999 win was a mistake, as well. He was very effective with Road Dogg in the Outlaws, but he was just not singles star material. He's the perennial KOTR winner that went nowhere after his win, right along with Mabel. Back then KOTR was a sign of great things to come, and instead Gunn jobbed to Rock at Summerslam and went right back to the tag division.

I think they really mishandled British Bulldog when he came back in 1999. Granted, he might have been in a really bad way at that point, but come on. Jeans, work boots and his pant legs stuff into his socks? He looked like him sort of Neo-Nazi. Completely the wrong thing to do with him. Then he and the Mean Street Posse got paired up. That was a real head scratcher.

As other have said, Wrestlemania 2000 not having any regular singles matches. I love Mick Foley, but he and Big Show shouldn't have been in main event.

I'm sure there are others, as well. This sticks out the most to me.
1. Rikishi would've been by himself without HHH but his Heel run failed.
2. Hand stuff was funny but stupid
3. Tazz should've been pushed in 2000
4. Chyna wasn't great cause her 5 moves of doom sucks so is IC title reign
5. Billy Gunn should've been pushed as main-eventer, would've been good Heel
6. Bulldog would've been pushed 2 face HHH, Rock, Austin, Big Show etc but never won WWF title
7. Rock-HHH WM16 will be 10 times better but Foley hasn't main-evented
Austin & DX is offline  
post #48 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 01:30 PM
Challenging SCOTT STEINER's authority
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
                     
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

There was a LOT of crap back then, but I wouldn't say any were any real mistakes. A mistake is putting the belt on David Arquette, or letting a lot of cheques bounce therefore you're not paying your talent.

Stuff like Mae Young giving birth, or Vince's reveal as the Higher Power, or further Rikishi running Austin over and even further to Katie Vick, were all just stupid booking decisions or just illogical writing.

There is a lot to list in terms of poor wrestling, bad storylines and ridiculous happenings, but very very few mistakes, if any.
Issues_Sunshyne is offline  
post #49 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 02:36 PM
Working on my abs
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Woodsboro High
Posts: 2,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
                 
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

The biggest mistake is they did too much - too many turns, title changes, stunts, angles, backstage brawls etc. You could say it was too entertaining.

It made everything that came after 2001 seem boring by comparison.
JigsawKrueger is offline  
post #50 of 128 (permalink) Old 11-12-2012, 02:57 PM
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Bonny Bonny Banks
Posts: 886
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
             
Re: Biggest mistakes in the Attitude Era?

Absolutely none. The era was gold, and deep, deep down - none of us would change a damn thing... Apart from Vince McMahon winning the WWF Title... that was horrible.




Gaz. is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome